NE Region General Questions

[Hugenerd]

Great night for the NE teams, going 7-2 and placing 8 teams in the round of 32.  One of those losses was Salem State to RIC, so an intra-region loss.  The only other loss was Endicott, and they had every opportunity to win, as they were up double-digits in the 2nd half but fell by 1 in OT.

Some interesting NE matchups tomorrow: Middlebury vs. Albertus, MIT gets a neutral court game vs. Farmingdale, East Conn plays Oswego who had all types of problems with Endicott, RIC plays at Staten Island, Becker gets Scranton, West Conn plays at F&M, and Amherst hosts NYU.

[pjunito]

Excellent job again HN! Thanks for the updates; the NE region is proving that it is worth having so many at large bids.

[Hugenerd]

Excellent job again HN! Thanks for the updates; the NE region is proving that it is worth having so many at large bids.

Should have had 2 more.  Birmingham Southern lost to Wittenberg and St. Joe's (LI) lost to Albertus.  Those should have been WPI and Keene's spots.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Birmingham Southern played very well against Wittenberg... that was a tough game the whole way. Lower end NE teams didn't deserve a bid over BSC.

[Hugenerd]

You were making the opposite argument yourself when it was LEC teams vs. MIT earlier.  BSC had an SOS around 0.45 and 3 losses while WPI had an SOS close to 0.60 with 7 losses.  MIT's SOS disparity wasnt nearly that great with the LEC teams (~0.03-0.05)  in the first couple of regional rankings, with 4 less losses (5 vs. 1 at the time) and you were saying those rankings were justifiable. What gives?

By the way, with regard to your discussion on Hoopsville, despite having some seniors on their roster, the only player MIT is losing to graduation is the currently injured Billy Bender.  3 'seniors'  have a year of eligibility remaining because of medical redshirts  (Hollingsworth, Karraker, and McCue), plus Kates and Tashman are juniors.

[mass_d3fan]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region. 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

Not at all true.  I went to both games tonight.  I was incredibly impressed with the talent and intelligence of the MIT team (Kates is incredible), my frame of reference shifted as soon as the teams came out to warm up for the second game.  Both F&M and Amherst were bigger, stronger, deeper, and more athletic.

I'm not saying MIT couldn't hang with either of them or even win, but they're certainly not better.  Those were two championship caliber teams; MIT would have to go on a run and get some luck to win the whole thing.

I'll be rooting for MIT tomorrow, but if they win, it will be an upset.

Amherst is still #1 in NE in my book.  MIT might have jumped over Middlebury for me tonight; I'll have to think about it.

[Hugenerd]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

Not at all true.  I went to both games tonight.  I was incredibly impressed with the talent and intelligence of the MIT team (Kates is incredible), my frame of reference shifted as soon as the teams came out to warm up for the second game.  Both F&M and Amherst were bigger, stronger, deeper, and more athletic.

I'm not saying MIT couldn't hang with either of them or even win, but they're certainly not better.  Those were two championship caliber teams; MIT would have to go on a run and get some luck to win the whole thing.

I'll be rooting for MIT tomorrow, but if they win, it will be an upset.

Amherst is still #1 in NE in my book.  MIT might have jumped over Middlebury for me tonight; I'll have to think about it.

Looks like you were wrong.

I also don't get how you say that F&M looked 'bigger and stronger' than MIT.  Tashman was clearly the biggest and strongest player on the court, and he, Hollingsworth, and MITs main insde sub, Acker, are all taller than anyone F&M has.  Deeper and more athletic may be more accurate, but don't underestimate chemistry, leadership, composure, and intelligence.

MIT has won their last 3 games by at least 15 points, and those have all been in the NCAA tourney...pretty impressive.

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

I'm going to have to agree with mass' comment.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

As a team, they looked bigger and stronger.  Obviously, MIT has the two biggest, strongest guys on the floor, but F&M had four or five big dudes to throw at them, plus a number of good sized guards.

I have to give MIT all the credit in the world for that win.  They played smart, learned from the night before and got a break with the injury.  They earned every bit of it and I was rooting for them.  I still think it was an upset and I'm not entirely convinced they're better than Amherst overall.

They're certainly going to get a big test in Whitewater, but I will now be expecting them to figure it out and give Davis fits.

[WPI89]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

Not at all true.  I went to both games tonight.  I was incredibly impressed with the talent and intelligence of the MIT team (Kates is incredible), my frame of reference shifted as soon as the teams came out to warm up for the second game.  Both F&M and Amherst were bigger, stronger, deeper, and more athletic.

I'm not saying MIT couldn't hang with either of them or even win, but they're certainly not better.  Those were two championship caliber teams; MIT would have to go on a run and get some luck to win the whole thing.

I'll be rooting for MIT tomorrow, but if they win, it will be an upset.

Amherst is still #1 in NE in my book.  MIT might have jumped over Middlebury for me tonight; I'll have to think about it.

Hoops I hadn't even seen this one before I commented on the NEWMAC site - you are so way off on this - it is silly.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

Not at all true.  I went to both games tonight.  I was incredibly impressed with the talent and intelligence of the MIT team (Kates is incredible), my frame of reference shifted as soon as the teams came out to warm up for the second game.  Both F&M and Amherst were bigger, stronger, deeper, and more athletic.

I'm not saying MIT couldn't hang with either of them or even win, but they're certainly not better.  Those were two championship caliber teams; MIT would have to go on a run and get some luck to win the whole thing.

I'll be rooting for MIT tomorrow, but if they win, it will be an upset.

Amherst is still #1 in NE in my book.  MIT might have jumped over Middlebury for me tonight; I'll have to think about it.

Hoops I hadn't even seen this one before I commented on the NEWMAC site - you are so way off on this - it is silly.

MIT moved up the list for me after Saturday.  They're definitely ahead of Middlebury.  I'm still debating between them an Amherst.  Amherst had real, serious problems adjusting to the level of play by F&M, who was able to use the same post to post cut move for open layups at least ten times during the game.  MIT proved more than able to make the needed adjustments.  I was worried they'd succumb to foul issues with F&M having so many big bodies, but they put that question to rest as well.

If they handle Chris Davis the same way, they'll definitely jump Amherst - who I still see as having the highest potential of any team in the country.  They failed in execution when it mattered most, which is a strike against them.  I don't like to make rankings based on one game or even a weekend.  The difference is really about perspective.  If it's one game in a pressure situation, I'll take MIT, but if we're talking a 100 games, I'm still undecided on who I favor (I think it's close) - usually I use the latter when ranking teams.

The bottom line is that MIT is still playing and thus still proving themselves.  That will help in the long run.

[BBallers]

I have been one of the biggest voices complaining about MIT's schedule, but now there is no doubt - The Engineers are the best team in the Northeast Region.

Not at all true.  I went to both games tonight.  I was incredibly impressed with the talent and intelligence of the MIT team (Kates is incredible), my frame of reference shifted as soon as the teams came out to warm up for the second game.  Both F&M and Amherst were bigger, stronger, deeper, and more athletic.

I'm not saying MIT couldn't hang with either of them or even win, but they're certainly not better.  Those were two championship caliber teams; MIT would have to go on a run and get some luck to win the whole thing.

I'll be rooting for MIT tomorrow, but if they win, it will be an upset.

Amherst is still #1 in NE in my book.  MIT might have jumped over Middlebury for me tonight; I'll have to think about it.

Hoops I hadn't even seen this one before I commented on the NEWMAC site - you are so way off on this - it is silly.

MIT moved up the list for me after Saturday.  They're definitely ahead of Middlebury.  I'm still debating between them an Amherst.  Amherst had real, serious problems adjusting to the level of play by F&M, who was able to use the same post to post cut move for open layups at least ten times during the game.  MIT proved more than able to make the needed adjustments.  I was worried they'd succumb to foul issues with F&M having so many big bodies, but they put that question to rest as well.

If they handle Chris Davis the same way, they'll definitely jump Amherst - who I still see as having the highest potential of any team in the country.  They failed in execution when it mattered most, which is a strike against them.  I don't like to make rankings based on one game or even a weekend.  The difference is really about perspective.  If it's one game in a pressure situation, I'll take MIT, but if we're talking a 100 games, I'm still undecided on who I favor (I think it's close) - usually I use the latter when ranking teams.

The bottom line is that MIT is still playing and thus still proving themselves.  That will help in the long run.

"MIT moved up the list for me after Saturday."
Well that was very nice of you.  Is it a correct assumption that you did not agree with the D3 Hoops #3 ranking?  If you watched any of the NEWMAC conference games, you may have a better opinion of MIT's SOS.  IMHO, WPI and Springfield were good enough to be in the NCAA's and probably would have beaten the first 3 opponents MIT faced.  They are both much much better than Skidmore.

"I'm still debating between them an Amherst."
Um ... you did say you saw the 2 games at F&M correct?  Did you think Amherst just had a off-game against the #1 overall defense in D3 or was it F&M's defense?

"MIT proved more than able to make the needed adjustments.  I was worried they'd succumb to foul issues with F&M having so many big bodies, but they put that question to rest as well."
Again, I respectively disagree.  I do not believe MIT made any adjustments as I believe they knew they were the better team coming into the game and ran the normal offense/defense.  I believe F&M failed to make any needed adjustments.  I do agree with you about being concerned about the fouls, especially near the end of the game as MIT does not utilize its bench as much as the other teams.  MIT played F&M one starter down in a predominately 6 man rotation and beat them convincingly in their home court.

"They failed in execution when it mattered most, which is a strike against them."
That's putting it mildly.  Did you notice how many free throws that F&M missed near the end of the game?  They had many more chances than they should have received.

"I don't like to make rankings based on one game or even a weekend.  The difference is really about perspective.  If it's one game in a pressure situation, I'll take MIT, but if we're talking a 100 games, I'm still undecided on who I favor (I think it's close) - usually I use the latter when ranking teams."
I understand and agree with you to a point.  I believe Amherst and MIT are very comparable and it's a shame that Amherst was not able to have their "earned" host.  However, I do not believe the result would change, i.e., I believe F&M would still have won.  Besides both of these one-game viewpoints on results, i.e., F&M over Amherst and MIT over F&M, do you still believe that Amherst would win more games out of 100, if MIT had their 5th starter in a predominately 6 man rotation?

You had some good points and I also root for the other NEWMAC and NE Region teams (until they play MIT).  MIT is playing great basketball at this time and I don't believe there is a better or more valuable player in the tournament than Kates.  If MIT doesn't play good and Amherst does, I believe Amherst could win.  If they both play well with their full teams, I believe MIT is better, but that's from my MIT orientation, looking as common opponents and watching these NCAA games.  Amherst is a great team and has a fantastic program and I believe if they hosted (as they were entitled based on their great season against strong opponents) against some of the other regional sweet 16 teams in the other brackets, I believe they would have made the final 4.  I also believe Amherst would have easily beaten Staten Island.  Often matchups against certain teams make a big difference, especially good defensive teams.

[BBallers]

By the way, with regard to your discussion on Hoopsville, despite having some seniors on their roster, the only player MIT is losing to graduation is the currently injured Billy Bender.  3 'seniors'  have a year of eligibility remaining because of medical redshirts  (Hollingsworth, Karraker, and McCue), plus Kates and Tashman are juniors.

I totally expect MIT to have the top ranking next season and make another strong showing (if not win it all).  From my understanding, I believe McCue did not get into graduate school at MIT (as did Karraker and Holliingsworth).  This is really unfortunate because McCue came back from so many injuries.  The good news is he is having a great senior year and MIT is still playing great basketball!

[Hugenerd]

By the way, with regard to your discussion on Hoopsville, despite having some seniors on their roster, the only player MIT is losing to graduation is the currently injured Billy Bender.  3 'seniors'  have a year of eligibility remaining because of medical redshirts  (Hollingsworth, Karraker, and McCue), plus Kates and Tashman are juniors.

I totally expect MIT to have the top ranking next season and make another strong showing (if not win it all).  From my understanding, I believe McCue did not get into graduate school at MIT (as did Karraker and Holliingsworth).  This is really unfortunate because McCue came back from so many injuries.  The good news is he is having a great senior year and MIT is still playing great basketball!

I hadn't heard about McCue's admissions status yet, that is unfortunate.  However, MIT still has some talented players coming back that aren't getting much PT right now, so they should be able to fill in nicely.  Still, getting your 4 top scorers back aint bad.  I am sure Coach Anderson also has some pretty good recruits coming in, as he has the past few classes.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

There's certainly no more valuable player in the tournament than Kates.  He's absolutely integral to what they do.  They wouldn't even be in the tournament without him, let alone the final four.

I do expect they'll be pre-season #1 - typically the pre-season #1 is the team in the final 8 who brings back the most starters.  MIT will fit that bill, assuming everyone does indeed come back.